[Retracted] Influence of China’s Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme on Green Innovation of Enterprises

Abstract

China’s economic growth has entered “new normal,” and the task of reducing carbon emissions has become more onerous. Hence, this study aimed to explore whether China’s carbon emissions trading pilot policy stimulated corporate green innovation capabilities. The data pertained to the green patent data of the listed companies in Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges during 2008–2018. Using a difference-in-difference-in-differences (DDD) method, the study took advantage of the variations across regions, across enterprises, and across years and obtained several novel findings. First, the pilot carbon emissions trading policy significantly stimulated the green innovation capabilities of emission control companies in the pilot areas compared with enterprises in nonpilot areas and the nonemission control list. Second, the effect of the policy on the improvement in corporate green innovation capabilities might be driven by the improvement in corporate input factor allocation efficiency and the additional benefits that could be obtained from the carbon trading market. Third, the positive effect of the policy on the green innovation capabilities of state-owned enterprises was more significant. Therefore, the establishment and promotion of a unified national carbon emissions trading market and supporting mechanisms should be accelerated to achieve the balance of stable economic growth and carbon emission task.

Can Setting Up a Carbon Trading Mechanism Improve Urban Eco-Efficiency? Evidence from China

“…Liu, Baoliu [9] 2021 In pilot regions, carbon emissions equity trading policies can improve total factor productivity in the green economy. Qi, Yawei [11] 2022…”

Retracted: Influence of China’s Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme on Green Innovation of Enterprises

“…This article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [ 1 ]. This investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process: Discrepancies in scope Discrepancies in the description of the research reported Discrepancies between the availability of data and the research described Inappropriate citations Incoherent, meaningless and/or irrelevant content included in the article Peer-review manipulation …”

“…Tis article has been retracted by Hindawi following an investigation undertaken by the publisher [1]. Tis investigation has uncovered evidence of one or more of the following indicators of systematic manipulation of the publication process:…”